Fairchild XSOK-1 Flying Boat Project of 1934

[hesham]

Hi,

the Fairchild XSOK-1 was a naval flying boat project of 1934,intended to be two or
three place flying boat,and powered by one 700 hp Wright R-1510 engine,very similar
to F91,so cancelled in 1935.

American Flying Boats and Amphibious Aircraft

 

[Maveric]

Do you know the Fairchild designation for this project?

 

[hesham]

Do you know the Fairchild designation for this project?

Sorry my dear Maveric,I don't know.

 

[Stargazer]

I think it's much better to share the picture with the accompanying text, isn't it, hesham?

As for the Fairchild designation, I have never been able to find it...

 

[Stargazer]

Two things I wish to add:

1°) The exact model type was to be the Wright R-1510-C (source: Aircraft Yearbook 1935).

2°) Pan Am's "Baby Clipper" carried the "Model 91" designation. The military scout variants for export were known as the XA-942, A-942A and A-942-B Amphibion (perhaps suggesting these were "Model 94" sub-types?). Although marketed as a Fairchild, this was actually product of Fairchild's Kreider-Reisner subsidiary, whose last product was the Model 95 Pilgrim (XC-31), before Fairchild dissolved the company and replaced it with its American ("Pilgrim") subsidiary. So if there is any kind of logic, the SOK would have been in between, perhaps using the "92", "93" (or "94"?) slot. But Fairchild/K-R designations are not always completely logical...

 

[hesham]

Thank you Skyblazer,

but as you know,the M-92 was allocated to XNQ-1;

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3686.0.html

 

[Stargazer]

Thank you Skyblazer,

but as you know,the M-92 was allocated to XNQ-1;

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3686.0.html

No, no! The M- system came later than that. No relation to the old Fairchild/Kreider-Reisner one.

Something I've just come across: The aero-web.org site claims that the XSOK-1 was called the Seagull, but coming from this website, and considering it's not mentioned anywhere else that I know, I'd take it with a pinch of salt... http://www.aero-web.org/specs/kreireis/xsok-1.htm

 

[Jos Heyman]

As far as I know the Fairchild designation was XA942.
A modified version of the Fairchild 91 transport amphibian, it was ordered in September 1934 as XSOK-1 with serial 9724. A mock up was built but the aircraft itself was never built and further development was cancelled in August 1935.
The civilian version of the Fairchild 91 flew for the first time on 5 April 1935 and five were built.

 

[Stargazer]

As far as I know the Fairchild designation was XA942.
A modified version of the Fairchild 91 transport amphibian, it was ordered in September 1934 as XSOK-1 with serial 9724. A mock up was built but the aircraft itself was never built and further development was cancelled in August 1935.
The civilian version of the Fairchild 91 flew for the first time on 5 April 1935 and five were built.

Wrong on all counts.

1°) There were more than five aircraft built, actually seven. Two went to Brazil, one to Spain (the former prototype), two to Japan, and two to private owners before changing hands. Constructor's numbers go up to 9407 (including the prototype).

2°) As the type was initially designed for Pan Am, their version was refered to as the Baby Clipper. However, the type's company name was simply Amphibion.

3°) Model 91 was merely the commercial designation for all Fairchild Amphibions. XA-942, (X)A-942A and (X)A-942B were variants of that, and these are the designations that appear on ATC registers.
The XA-942 was the 650hp Pratt & Whitney Hornet version (prototype).
The XA-942A was the 750hp Pratt & Whitney Hornet S2E-G version (next four examples + upgraded prototype).
The XA-942B was the 750/760hp Wright Cyclone version (last two examples).

4°) Both these designations and the fact that the constructor's numbers begin with 94** suggests that the type MAY actually have been known inhouse as the Model 94. This was standard fashion at Fairchild, in the same way that the Model 51 series, for instance, actually included Models 51, 61, 65 and 72.

5°) There is no indication that the SOK design was part of the Model 91 series at all. A close comparison I made of the two actually shows a lot of differences in hull shape, wing shape and configuration, which all make it unlikely. It was certainly derived from it, but NOT the XA-942 at all.

 

[Bill S]

I thought I had posted these to the forum earlier, apologies.

From NARA II 72-AC-98D Fairchild XSOK-1 Mock Up.

 

[Bill S]

Again scans from a NARA II visit last year the final four that I captured of the XSOK-1 Mock Up

 

[Stargazer]

I thought I had posted these to the forum earlier, apologies.
From NARA II 72-AC-98D Fairchild XSOK-1 Mock Up.

Goodness gracious!!! This is too marvelous for words. I spent several hours trying in vain to create a decent profile view of the SOK from the blurry photo, because some elements were missing... Now I have plenty of details to maybe even do a three-view of it! Thanks a zillion times for these.

 

[Bill S]

Glad they were of help and interest!